SNIP
>
>Does this denies that a programmer can do great things with DBF tables? Of course not. Universal Thread is a living proof of how many things can be done with them. But in most cases, SQL Server/MSDE is -in some people perspective- a better alternative that don't necesarilly involves speding a lot of money or having to start all your programming from scratch.

Well I think it would do us ALL a great service if you could have an article in the magazine that gave us a good 'context' for MSDE.

I'm thinking of:
a) What precisely are the differences between full SQL Server and MSDE and what are the implications of each as far as deploying MSDE in VFP is concerned.

b) What are the differences between DBC/DBFs and SQL data and precisely HOW does one accommodate those differences in a MSDE implementation?
*IF* security is mentioned here (I guess it will be) then a description not just of what MSDE can do that VFP can't, but HOW it is done.

c) What are the other differences between VFP and MSDE and SQL Server. Things like (i) language for stored procedures; (ii) maintenance of stored procedures; (iii) transaction log handling; (iv) backup/restore/recovery procedures; (v) debugging and update/'repair' procedures; (vi) OS and HD requirements; (vii) application upgrading; (viii) etc.

d) What are the **REAL** facts as regarding 'upgrading' a MSDE application to SQL Server. Things like:
0) cost
1) installation and software maintenance;
2) deploying the (previously) missing parts;
3) implications on installed OS and impact if change is needed.

I remain of the FIRM conviction that JimD severely maligned VFP native data when there is absolutely no need to do so, and I don't see why you say otherwise when he admitted so in his reply to me in the "Blatant attack..." thread.

I have nothing against sensible and honourable and honest and practical sessions/reports/etc that promote the alternative use of MSDE (or SQL Server) within VFP applications. JimD didn't even come close to that.

cheers

>
>Nothing more, and nothing less.
>
>Best regards,